The recent elimination by the Trump administration of a specialized office within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has triggered broad concern regarding the future of federally funded benefit programs tied to poverty guidelines. The now-defunct Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE) Division of Data and Technical Analysis, which estimated yearly federal poverty levels, played a key role in setting Medicaid, food assistance, and other safety-net programs’ eligibility for over 80 million Americans.
The disbanded office’s role
The ASPE staff inflated Census Bureau poverty statistics every year as required by an 1981 appropriations act. The guidelines determine eligibility for programs that are means-tested, including Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), and Affordable Care Act (ACA) subsidies. For 2025, the guidelines determine the poverty level is $15,650 for a single person and $32,150 for a family of four.
The office had a formal procedure: four analysts independently computed adjustments using consumer price index data, double-checking results for consistency. Long-time economist Kendall Swenson, who was among those terminated in the reductions, had overseen this procedure for decades and had built a reputation as the institutional authority on poverty measures.
Sudden dismissals and loss of institutional knowledge
On April 10, 2025, the Trump administration issued surprise reduction-in-force (RIF) notices to the entire nine-member ASPE data team. Employees were locked out of their systems, denying knowledge transfer or training of their replacements. Robin Ghertner, the previous division director, pointed out that “no one in government now knows how to calculate the guidelines,” as the process involved proprietary adjustments outside of basic inflation arithmetic.
The terminations came on the heels of larger HHS staff reductions of 20,000 positions, such as the merging of ASPE with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). The staff at ASPE dropped from 140 to 40 workers, greatly impairing its capacity to carry out statutory responsibilities like Medicaid funding decisions and regulatory review.
Threats to benefit programs immediate
Without updated 2026 guidelines, states and federal governments are faced with two unfavorable scenarios:
- Static thresholds: Keeping recipients at 2025 levels in the face of inflation would cut recipients whose nominal income rises but real purchasing power falls. For example, a family of five with a $37,650 income—the 2025 cutoff—would lose Medicaid if their income jumped to $38,000 despite 7% inflation.
- Decentralized standards: Regulators who develop ad hoc thresholds may create eligibility disparities among states and prompt legal battles over unequal access to benefits.
Of approximately 79 million Medicaid/CHIP recipients, 40 million SNAP participants, and 40% of American births that rely on WIC benefits, all are in jeopardy as 2026 approaches. ACA marketplace subsidies, which depend on poverty levels, may be similarly made uncertain.
Political responses and administrative resistance
Congressional Democrats, with Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) spearheading the charge, demanded HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. appear before Congress to justify the cuts, calling them “devastating” and “without rationale.” The reductions were called “completely nuts” by former HHS official Wendell Primus, who blamed the White House for interfering with departmental planning.
HHS spokesman Andrew Nixon denied reports of operational failure, adding that other workers could perform the poverty guideline functions. Economists like Timothy Smeading of the University of Wisconsin argued that Swenson’s experience was not substitutable without months of training in a specific area.
Legal and ethical concerns
The 1981 law mandating that HHS update poverty guidelines annually invites potential legal liability if the lapsed office leads to late deadlines. Civil rights groups caution that frozen ceilings would disproportionately harm rural communities and racial minorities, who make up 60% of Medicaid recipients and 41% of SNAP beneficiaries.
The collapse of ASPE’s data unit underscores the susceptibility of institutional knowledge in federal policymaking. With no open-ended plan to make up for the office’s work, millions of low-income Americans risk losing important benefits amid rising living costs. While the administration frames the reductions as bureaucratic streamlining, specialists characterize them as a destabilizing action that risk undoing decades of anti-poverty achievements. As Congress sets HHS under the gun for answers, the looming 2026 guideline deadline tests the government’s capacity to uphold its safety-net promises to the public.
Read more: These are the two products Trump has ‘saved’ from historic 145% tariffs on China in an unprecedented trade war
Read more: What is a bear market? Stocks are falling amid Trump’s tariffs and fears of trade war with China and half the world
